Suggestions and Requests

[ShinobiHus92]

Personally I would love to see the Vikings being more aggressive and warmongering. Perhaps introducing more conquering events for them? Siege of Paris 845 or the Norman conquests etc?

Also there is a Varangian Guard Unit mod, perhaps implementing in the future so that the Byzantines can buy/hire them from the Vikings and Rus' respectfully

https://forums.civfanatics.com/resources/varangian-guard.19360/

 

[1SDANi]

Personally I would love to see the Vikings being more aggressive and warmongering. Perhaps introducing more conquering events for them? Siege of Paris 845 or the Norman conquests etc?

Also there is a Varangian Guard Unit mod, perhaps implementing in the future so that the Byzantines can buy/hire them from the Vikings and Rus' respectfully

https://forums.civfanatics.com/resources/varangian-guard.19360/
View attachment 602285

Yeah, I rarely see the Vikings attack anything that isn't a Celtic city in Ireland.

 

[Cosmos1985]

That's strange, in my games they often attack either England or HRE and behave like they should in that era. Well, guess it should rather be France than HRE, but at least they are usually aggressive and create some chaos.

To me the biggest concern is that they collapse too often.

 

[BaneFire]

To be honest I think we might even need some extra turns in that general era, in turn I would hope this lets us represent one of my favourite eras in history better - the Dark Age.
Visigoths vs Umayyads in Spain, Frankish into Holy Roman Empire in Europe, Byzantines vs Slavs and Turks, the discussed Vikings, so on and so on. It's not even like there needs to be new civs, just a bit more time to explore these events.

 

[Aradziem]

To be honest I think we might even need some extra turns in that general era, in turn I would hope this lets us represent one of my favourite eras in history better - the Dark Age.
Visigoths vs Umayyads in Spain, Frankish into Holy Roman Empire in Europe, Byzantines vs Slavs and Turks, the discussed Vikings, so on and so on. It's not even like there needs to be new civs, just a bit more time to explore these events.

What about adding more turns to game in modern times, to represent covid-19 spread across World (medicine technology not stopping it) , and maybe adding events like vaccine creation

 

[Aradziem]

What about adding more turns to game in modern times, to represent covid-19 spread across World (medicine technology not stopping it) , and maybe adding events like vaccine creation

Somebody actually wrote covid-19 spread in Completely Dumb Ideas thread

 

[1SDANi]

Somebody actually wrote covid-19 spread in Completely Dumb Ideas thread

Can't remember the post in question but assuming it wasn't someone anti-science, I think that's more because DoC doesn't really bother with following history from WW1 onwards due to how complicated it all gets, which is why things like North/South Korea, the destabilization of the middle east by western powers, and post-WWII military strategy (MAD, proxy wars, etc) are ideas which would be "dumb" to suggest for DoC.

They themselves are not dumb ideas, but things of their nature have been suggested and subsequently deconfirmed so many times that it's basically a meme at this point.

 

[JHLee]

Tolerance seems like a very weak civic, especially if you are enacting Monarchy and so can easily offset the unhappy penalty from non-state religions.
Usually I only select Tolerance for stability's sake.
I have a suggestion to slightly buff Tolerance.
How about adding "+2 Happiness from Cathedrals of non-state religions" (so that non-state religion cathedrals grant the same amount of happiness as state relgion ones)?
This would also incentivize players to spread religion and build cathedrals in the Industrial and later eras.

 

[Cosmos1985]

What about a slight GP boost pr. non-state religion in order to simulate diversity/enlightenment/etc.?

 

[JHLee]

What about a slight GP boost pr. non-state religion in order to simulate diversity/enlightenment/etc.?

That might overshadow Secularism, which is supposed to be, well, the "utmost tolerant" religion civic.

 

[Aradziem]

Somebody actually wrote covid-19 spread in Completely Dumb Ideas thread

What about a plague event in year 2020?

I meant the second post

 

[Dracosolon]

Just for fun, but I always found Priests' jack-of-all-trades nature a bit odd as far as Specialists go, so I thought it might be flavorful if they were a more flexible type, receiving a minor bonus depending on your religious Civic:

-Animism: (oral tradition, etc. and as a flexible lever of expansion before Artists really show up),
-Deification: (great projects to the leader's glory),
-Clergy: (the growing assets that tend to flow from the church's ties to secular society),
-Monasticism: (though maybe in this case this should instead be tied to Monasteries somehow),
-Theocracy: (should be self-explanatory),
-Tolerance: not sure, maybe a generic bonus to growth?
-Secularism obviously doesn't get anything.

The idea is that all of these should be mediocre compared to other specialists, but constitute a supplementary strategy for civs witth a lot of Priest slots.

 

[HollyhockMon]

Hi, I'm fairly new to this ...

I think the nuclear submarine should be able to carry an ICBM. Also I find this idea really interesting - Letters of last resort - Wikipedia - and wonder if it could be implemented in game?

I absolutely love this Mod. Thank you.

 

[JHLee]

Is the "Lost Battles to Barbarians" penalty really necessary?
Civs like Rome, China, and Russia face endless parades of barbarians, and they aren't exactly easy to defeat without losses, especially in the early game.

 

[1SDANi]

Is the "Lost Battles to Barbarians" penalty really necessary?
Civs like Rome, China, and Russia face endless parades of barbarians, and they aren't exactly easy to defeat without losses, especially in the early game.

And they all had stability issues at varying points for, in whole or in part, conflicts with barbarians at the borders.

 

[JHLee]

Farm spam with Vassalage + Manoralism in the Middle Era is very powerful,
and it seems that even with Moors and Arabia, there is no reason to pick Slavery over Manoralism.
(At least in the 600AD start)

How about buffing Slavery so that Muslim civs have an incentive to pick it?
My suggestion is to allow Muslim civs to acquire slaves from victories (as a religion bonus),
and enable civs with Slavery to either settle slaves in cities, or use them to boost building production.

This will also represent the active acquisition/trade/usage of slaves done by the Muslims from the Middle Ages up to 19c.

 

[JHLee]

And they all had stability issues at varying points for, in whole or in part, conflicts with barbarians at the borders.

I meant that losing battles to barbarians is, in itself, a penalty because it means that your tiles are going to be plundered, your cities/workers might be in danger, and you have to invest more hammers in replacing the lost units.
Do you really need another kick in the butt?

 

[Zaddy]

I think it is a bit lame that you can win 90% of your battles vs Barbarians and still get the stability malus because of the ~10% you lose due to bad luck, and just general attrition. The malus isn't really that big through, so it doesn't bother me that much. But it does make me roll my eyes that I'm getting a malus when I'm completely dominating the barbs.

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

I think the nuclear submarine should be able to carry an ICBM.

Huh? The whole point of ICBMs is that they aren't mobile. You sure you aren't thinking of Tactical Nukes?

 

[HollyhockMon]

Huh? The whole point of ICBMs is that they aren't mobile. You sure you aren't thinking of Tactical Nukes?

I think they're called SLBM (Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile). In game there's only the ICBM isn't there? So to make it simple just enable a submarine to carry an ICBM.